Well depending on species, they tend to bloom and provide fragrance when nothing else is (either late fall or mid winter to earliest spring). They do best with ample sunlight, they are not a shade plant and will not perform well there.

Here, even the non-native hybrids are "environmental useful" in that they attract our resident overwintering hummingbirds.

sah67 - no my frustrations is not that they grow like shrubs, just that they take up quite a bit of space and aren't very pleasant to look at. It's very possible that others have had far better luck. I did post photos of the trees and leaves on this forum once and others seemed fairly sure they were witch hazel trees. As far as the "useful" comment I should have elaborated, there are several other trees I would like to plant that I've researched and found would be highly beneficial to the birds and other animals in my region. I don't know particularly about the use for witch hazel (other than the medicinal properties), I did mean that I know for sure the other trees are very productive as far as fruit production and resources for animals.

i dont think the ID really matters ...

be done with them.. ASAP .... lifes to short to waste space on things that dont inspire you ... whatever they are ...

youve given them more than enough of a chance ... times up ...

ken

ps: i had 2 WHs ... up here in snow clad MI .... who in the heck needs a plant that flowers in 2 or 3 feet of snow ... i trudged out there once to see the 3 flowers ... lol ... i have no clue when they died... because i never went back out there ... lol ... took me 10 minutes longer to dress up to go out.. than i spent out there ... and in summer.. its an otherwise nondescript plant ... i must admit.. i have seen some in much warmer zones that are inspiring .... whatever.. lol ...

Regarding environmental utility, I think we should stop thinking of this as black and white. Almost every plant offers some utility- shelter, food for one particular insect or bird, some carbon sequestration, some shade or erosion control, etc. But that does not make them equal. So ggal, please let us know how your particular cultivars or hybrids stack up against their native counterparts. Do they feed anything other than hummingbirds, and at what stage of their lifecycle? I know there are non natives that are beneficial, but we need to understand exactly how when making assessments like the one the OP is trying to do. She’s getting lots of traditional gardener advice here but I think she is asking for and deserves more.

I have read others complain about the non-descript presence for most of the year. I like the leaves and habit, personally. I was thinking of replacing some actual weed trees in my yard (black locust and bird-planted prunus avium) with a witch hazel. Maybe you can thin them, do some pruning of nearby vegetation to get them more light, or move one to a better spot for it while you find something else for the area you are looking at.

If you are attempting to support the local wildlife, consider that the witch hazel likely evolved as part of the ecosystem on your property, and its total removal will probably be felt by the wildlife. Actually the Hamamelis is more productive than I thought, serving as host plant to 72 species of lepidoptera. http://nwf.org/NativePlantFinder/Plants/1521 It might not be providing food directly to larger animals via nuts, seeds, leaves and fruit, but birds, other insectivores and predatory insects are probably searching it for bugs and larvae throughout the growing season.

Skip - I've found quite a few sources indicating that birds do indeed eat the seed pods, and not just the insects that are present on the plant.

Midwinter blooming plants provide vital pollen and nectar sources for various insects and honey bees. My bees are out in force anytime the temps are above 40º F. They have brood (baby bees) present after the winter solstice and need pollen. Mine are finding pollen on something now, have no idea what.

I wish I had space for a witch hazel. Pussy willows also bloom early, if you'd like something both unusual and tactile. It also seems to grow as a large shrub.

Nope, not overrated. I love the late season bright yellow blooms of native H. virginiana, and I love the bright yellow fall color. I adore the structure of the shrubs. I have an unnamed H. vernalis which is native to the US but not here which is OK but not a favorite. If the asian species and hybrids were hardy here, I would grow them as well as I love the late winter/early spring flowers and any insects that are out on warm spring days like them as well. I think if yours are suckering and are one of the own root natives, it may be that they are trying to replace wood that has been pruned off since I almost never see suckering on my natives.

From the research I have read, it is very difficult to make generalizations consistently about natives vs. nonnatives. It depends on species vs. cultivars, it varies according to particular genus, species, and selection vs. unnamed general plant vs. cultivar, and it depends on whether other plants in the same genus grow in the area. And then it depends on how you define native - to your property or county or state or region or country or continent. And are we considering the flower value or the seed value or the value of leaves to herbivorous insects. I think it makes more sense to research plants as individuals and see how a particular plant or cultivar of a plant, native or otherwise.

https://youtu.be/NTbPNwNIoLs

Doug is great

Thank you Jay for posting Doug Tallamy. Babs, I understand that non-natives can provide ecological services - but never as much as natives. Cultivars provide more, but often even they will have features that make them less accessible/visible/off schedule as the species. I agree with you that it is essential to identify the PARTICULAR plant in order to research its ecological value in one's PARTICULAR landscape. And not to rely on our visual, anecdotal observations. Remember how we thought buddleia were so wonderful for pollinators because we could see them covered with butterflies? They turn out to be death traps for them, attracting those insects with nectar for that one brief stage of their lifecycle but nothing to support their overall development. Skip, I must pipe up on behalf of your black locusts before you take an axe to them! Of all the trees on my property, I love my black locusts the best. They have majestically tall and straight trunks, with gnarled branches that make a gothic canopy in the moonlight. The leaves are delicate, late to emerge and easily broken down on the ground, giving a garden the presence and gravitas of substantial trees without the shade or heavy leaf litter. Locusts are not far behind oak trees in their ecological service. I had beekeepers ask to put their hives on my property precisely because of them! The bees love the locusts and the honey they produce is allergenic.

I do not claim more expertise than the professionals here, but I have learned enough to know the direction I want to follow in my gardening. I made a point of reading every book Doug Tallamy has written (so far), along with Carolyn Summers.

Black locust and tulip poplar are major nectar sources in my area. Without those 2 trees, we'd have little to no honey available for the bees or the people. Black locust makes fabulous fencing, thus the loss of so many trees in the farming areas around here.

Tallamy's book, "Bringing Nature Home", is one of my all-time favorites. He showcases a lot of research on the effects of "non-local natives", i.e. Blue Spruce being planted in the northeast and having little ecological value as compared to being planted in its native range in the mountain west. On the other hand, species that are pollinated or consumed by birds and insects with large migratory ranges (i.e. Echinacea), can still provide excellent ecological value when planted outside of their true, native range.

The book also has a great discussion of examples of closely related species in the same genera (Rhododendron is one example he presents), with the native species hosting far fewer insects than imported species from other continents, despite the physical and genetic similarities. On the contrary, there are also examples of non-native umbellifers like dill and parsley, that are heavily used as a host plants by native butterflies.

Additionally, when it comes to straight species natives vs. "nativars", Tallamy and a graduate student of his have done some really interesting research on insect herbivory, showing that's there not much difference between the two categories: https://mtcubacenter.org/do-leaf-eating-insects-eat-nativars/

When it comes to pollination, a separate group of researchers out of Vermont got some really interesting results suggesting that in many cases, straight species are much more attractive to pollinators than "nativars": https://pollinatorgardens.org/2013/02/08/my-research/

I agree that the native versus nonnative species discussion cannot just be black and white. And a major part of the discussion is just what constitutes a native plant. Here in North America with its vast array of geography and climate types, you cannot necessarily assume that a plant that is native to one area/region will automatically be suitable and equally as attractive when used as a native species outside of its common range. There is a huge difference in hardiness and overall suitability between say a New England native, a Texas native, a midwest plains native or a PNW native. As well as the types of wildlife or other fauna they might attract.

I can only speak from my PNW viewpoint but there are a limited number of local native plants that are well suited to a cultivated garden or landscape. Few are very garden worthy in that they have rampant or unruly growth habits, grow excessively large for many situations, prefer forested or heavily shaded, moist environments or just react negatively to a cultivated setting. And native plants from other parts of NA are often not very happy in the peculiarities of the PNW climate and growing conditions.

I would never consider this to be an either/or situation. Native plants DO provided garden benefit as they are typically well suited to the local climate and growing conditions. But when used outside of their natural range, they may lose those benefits. As well as not servicing the different wildlife present as they would within their range. But non-native exotics can also attract pollinators, support all manner of insect life, both good and bad, and therefore the birds that feed off of them. Some sort of blended balance between the two is what we should strive for.

Just to follow up, there are a dozen of these black locust trees on my property alone, and a dozen more nearby on the other side of the lot line, getting rid of them all is not really an option or a goal. Both of the trees I want to remove are sited far from the back thicket, in the middle of my yard, and are already rotting. Larry Weaner writes a lot about guiding the ecological succession of a site, and I'd like to guide my site away from an expanding and decaying black locust thicket to something more diverse, attractive, and suitable for the middle of an open space.